W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2001

Re: New checkpoint: identifying language

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 16:19:00 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Wendy and all,

         I prefer the term natural language as opposed to human language. 
It would be absurd to have to label any changes in web language within a 
page. As to the wording, is it really necessary to specify both "text" and 
"text equivalents"? Would there be someone who would put a page in English 
and all alt tags in French, such that it would have to be specified? And, 
now that I'm thinking about this issue, should we ask that the language in 
audio and multimedia be specified as well as that in text? Also, once the 
author has specified the language in metadata, and any changes in "mark 
up", how is this information presented to the user? When? Before they enter 
the site? On the opening screen? Or does it matter?


At 01:23 PM 8/3/01 -0400, Wendy A Chisholm wrote:
>We discussed a language checkpoint based on Gregory original proposal 
>[1].  This checkpoint was added to the 26 July 2001 draft as 1.4 with the 
>following text:
>1.4 Identify the primary natural language of text and text equivalents and 
>all changes in natural language.
>The only issue I have heard in regards to this checkpoint is the use of 
>"natural language."  Joe Clark suggests we say, "1.4 Identify the primary 
>human language of text and text equivalents and all changes in human 
>language. "
>Does anyone disagree with Joe's proposal?
>Is everyone happy with the premise of this checkpoint?
>[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2001AprJun/0495.html
>wendy a chisholm
>world wide web consortium
>web accessibility initiative
>seattle, wa usa

Anne Pemberton

Received on Friday, 3 August 2001 16:25:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:38 UTC